Analysis of Pupils' Academic Dishonesty in Modular Distance Learning in The New Normal

Saint Mary’s University
School of Teacher Education and Humanities

Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya, 3700
Analysis of Pupils’ Academic Dishonesty in Modular
Distance Learning in the New Normal
A Research Paper Presented to
The Faculty of the School of Teacher Education and Humanities
Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Course Requirements for the Degree
Bachelor in Elementary Education
Wendell Lordwyn F. Ramos
Roselyn D. Dawong
Gerome H. Bautista
Promoter
MAY 2022
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to acknowledge the following individuals who have extended

their valuable time, support, and assistance for the accomplishment of this paper.
To our parents and family who gave us life and unending love, care, and support
in every way they could.
We would like to express our unending gratitude to our promoter, Mr. Gerome
H. Bautista, for his great patience, assistance, generosity, and guidance throughout this
thesis.
To our panelists, Ms. Federicia C. Calauagan, Mrs. Arlene R. Querol, and Mr.
Rudyrick Alaman M. Dela Cruz, we wish to thank them for the critical criticism,
comments, and suggestions that led to the development of this thesis.
To Mrs. Jovelyn G. Lacangan which allowed us to conduct the thesis at their

school, and to Mrs. Gemma N. Sta. Ines which allowed us to conduct the pilot of the
thesis at their school.
And most of all, to our Almighty God, which gave us life and wisdom which
guides and protects us throughout our life.
We thank each and every one for the invaluable contribution, we shall be forever
grateful.
ii
DEDICATION
To my father Lito, mother Haydee, brother Harley, sister Mary, and my adviser Sir
Gerome.
- Ramos
To my mother Saline, father Carlos, sisters Phyl and Glad, and adviser sir Gerome
Bautista.
- Dawong
iii
Abstract
The researchers aimed to analyze the pupils’ academic dishonesty in modular distance
learning in the new normal. Thus, the study describes the pupil’s level of awareness and
extent of practice to the different behavior of academic dishonesty. In addition, on how
teachers identify and handle this kind of behavior and the recommended interventions to
handle such behavior. This study used a mixed-method approach, both qualitative and
quantitative approaches, and descriptive survey design. Findings reveal that in terms of
pupil’s level of awareness, pupils are not at all aware and their extent of practice have
never practiced any of the stated different behaviors of academic dishonesty, however,
teachers say otherwise. Further explored are the common reasons for academic
dishonesty, the findings revealed that pressure and expectations from parents is the top.
The majority of the teachers identify pupils committing academic dishonesty through the
handwritings, complexity of answer, and scores, where plagiarism as the most common
way. Overall, academic dishonesty occurs in the pupil’s works and their teachers see this
phenomenon caused by several reasons and can be handled in various way, however,
limited by the modular distance learning modality.
Keywords: academic dishonesty, modular distance learning, level of awareness, extent

of practice, recommended interventions
iv
Table of Contents
v
Pages
Acknowledgement i
Dedication ii
Abstract iv
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
Chapter
I INTRODUCTION
Effects of Pandemic 1
Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan 1
Modular Learning 2
Academic Dishonesty 2
Conceptual and Analytical Framework 4
Statement of the Problem 8
II METHODOLOGY
Research Design 9
Research Environment 9
Research Respondents 9
Research Instruments 9
Data Gathering Procedure 9
Treatment of Data 10
III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Section 1. Pupils’ Level of Awareness on the Different Behaviors
12
of Academic Dishonesty
Section 2. Pupils’ Extent of Practice of the Different Behaviors of
14
Academic Dishonesty
Section 3. How Teachers Identify and Handle the Behaviors of
20
Academic Dishonesty Committed by the Pupils
IV CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions 24
Recommendations 24
References 25
Appendices
A Informed Consent Form and Information Sheet 29
vi
B Data Gathering Instrument 31

C Acceptance Form 43
D Initial Plagiarism Check Clearance 44
E Final Plagiarism Check Clearance
F Initial Data Analysis Clearance
G Final Data Analysis Clearance
H Language Editing Clearance
I Oral Defense Recommendation Sheet
J Endorsement of Data Gathering
Curriculum Vitae
vii
List of Tables
Table Title Pages
1 Mean Ranges Interpretation 11
2 Pupils’ Level of Awareness on the Different Behaviors of
Academic Dishonesty 12
3 Pupils’ Extent of Practice of the Different Behaviors of Academic
Dishonesty 14
4 Pupils’ Sources of Copied Material without Citing 16
5 Likelihood of Pupils’ Reporting of Incidents of Academic
Dishonesty 17
6 Circumstances of Pupils that Justify Academic Dishonesty in their
Minds 18
7 Agreement of the Pupils to the Academic Dishonesty Status of
their School 19
8 Academic Environment of the School in terms of Academic
Dishonesty 20
viii
List of Figures
Figure Title Pages

1 Research Paradigm of the Study 7
2 General Outline of the Study (Procedural Flowchart) 10
ix
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
The present COVID-19 pandemic has brought difficulties and has influenced the
academic areas, and nobody knows when it will end. Each nation is as of now carrying
out plans and methodology on the best way to contain the virus, and the infections are
still ceaselessly rising. In the academic setting, to support and give quality education
notwithstanding lockdown and local area isolation, the new normal needs to be
contemplated in the arranging and execution of the “new normal educational policy”
(Tria, 2020).
Effects of Pandemic
These days, everyone stays at home because of the lockdown carried out by the
public authority. Various nations worldwide have presented different answers during
the pandemic to proceed with the schooling interaction - the presentation of distance
learning. These are internet learning stages like google, TV communicates, rules,
assets, video addresses, and online channels were presented (UNESCO, 2020). As
Indrajeewa (2021) has described, during this period, the educational community has
worked together to maintain the continuity of learning, for the children and students to
continue their own learning remotely, and made efforts on their own efforts to learn
through the Internet, television or radio. New pedagogical concepts and modes of
delivery are also adapted by teachers, even though they were not trained. Particularly
the learners of the most marginalized groups, who do not have much access to digital
learning resources are at risk of falling behind (Schleicher, 2020).
As Dangle and Sumaoang (2020) described, “face to face learning engagement of

students and teachers within the school has been suspended due to the COVID-19
pandemic. This pandemic has paved the way to the implementation of Modular
Distance Learning as an urgent response to ensure continuity of education.” For the
continuity of education and for every school to still achieve their mission and vision
which is to give quality education to every Filipino learner, the Department of
Education implemented the Modular Distance Learning. Distance Learning refers to a
learning delivery modality, where learning takes place between the teacher and the
learners who are geographically remote from each other during education (Quinones,
2020).
Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan
Under the Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan by the DepEd (2020), it has
recognized that the pandemic has posed challenges in many sectors and the basic
education is one of the most affected as schools and community centers are closed for
any physical conduct of classes. In order to respond to the basic challenges brought by
the pandemic, DepEd has developed the Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan
(BE-LCP) which includes designs for learning delivery strategy and operational
direction that will ensure the safety, health, and well-being of everyone.
Modular Learning
Modular learning is a form of distance learning that uses Self-Learning Modules

(SLM) based on the most essential learning competencies (MELCS) provided by
DepEd. The modules include sections on motivation and assessment that serve as a
complete guide of both teachers’ and students’ desired competencies. Learners’
progress is monitored by teachers through home visits (following social distancing
protocols) and feedback mechanisms, and help those who need special attention
(Manlangit, et al., 2020)
According to the study of Dangle and Sumaoang (2020), one of the main
problems in Modular Distance Learning is the great number of activities in each
module. Further stated is that the students are concerned if they have enough time to
answer all the modules within a week. Thus, teachers should re-evaluate the modules,
and they must make sure that all the lessons or activities are appropriate to the needs of
the learners because these are some reasons why learners attempt to do academic
dishonesty on their modules.
Academic Dishonesty
"Good academic work must be based on honesty" (NIU, 2019a). Advancing

trustworthiness in scholastic work requires understanding the meaning of academic
dishonesty, its various sorts, and its causes and results. According to Kibler (1993),
academic dishonesty means “forms of cheating and plagiarism that involve students
giving or receiving unauthorized assistance in an academic exercise or receiving credit
for work that is not their own.”
As mentioned in Samanta’s (2018) study, academic dishonesty is a growing

concern amongst students for better grades. It occurs in elementary level up to even in
master's level programs. With technology evolving making it easier to have access to
different tools, learners are faced with a decision to choose academic integrity or
academic dishonesty. Furthermore, in the event that children develop in an
environment such as this, they may see this as acceptable and expect this behavior.
What they do not realize is that this is a form of academic dishonesty, and they could
face serious consequences as a result. When parents are doing projects, writing college
entrance essays, and doing everything they can to help their child get ahead of the
pack, they are missing out on teachable moments and opportunities to instill integrity
in their children. (Riera and Di Prisco, 2002).
As mentioned by Peled et al. (2019), the unethical behaviors done in an

academic environment are determined as academic dishonesty.
Recent studies have already been conducted to study academic integrity and
academic dishonesty. A study by Peled et al. (2019), has presented a new structural
model for determinants of academic dishonesty which are, personality traits, students'
2
attitudes, linking types of motivation, and cultural backgrounds as predictors of

academic dishonesty in the context of traditional and distance-learning courses in
higher education. According to their survey of 2475 participants of varying
institutions, results showed that contrary to other studies, the participants engaged less
academic dishonesty in online class than in face-to-face setting.
The study by Krou and Fong (2020) on relationship of motivation and academic
dishonesty shows that the behavior is linked with the learners’ lack of motivation to
engage in an activity and extrinsic goal orientation. An additional given is that
learners’ age is a significant moderator for the relation between intrinsic motivation
and academic dishonesty. Distance education in many aspects is a lonely affair where
students are left to motivate themselves and to push through barriers and hurdles with
less help and support from peers and teachers, the sense of isolation is ever present. In
a situation where the student is left to self-motivate and to drive his/her own studies
forward there is an apparent need to understand what factors that affect motivation in
distance education Owens et al. (2009). Another study by Zaccoletti et al. (2020) on
motivation shows that compared to the test taken pre-COVID-19, there is a significant
decrease in their motivation.
From the study of Balbuena and Lamena (2015), prevalence of cheating on

exams and homework is still present, these dishonest behaviors are viewed by the
students as ordinary school acts, and their actions are a result of several factors. These
factors are mentioned by Balbuena and Lamena (2015) as “teacher’s and student’s
incompetence, unfavorable environment, and lenient imposition of school policy.”
A recent study by the Shalevska (2021), shows that the majority of the students
are in favor of the thought that students are more likely to cheat during online classes
and exams. For the second question on her study, as the question is directed to others,
the author expected a high level of honesty as the majority answered yes if they have
witnessed someone cheating on an online exam. For the third question of whether they
have cheated on an online exam, the majority admitted that they sometimes do it,
followed by never cheated and least is doing it often. And for the final question, the
motive was asked and the top two answers given were that they wanted better grades
and that it is easier to cheat now.
From the study of Xu, et al. (2013), an experiment is conducted to examine the
relation between honesty, benevolence, and trust in children who are ages 7-11. The
results indicated that children at the ages 7-11 considered honesty and benevolence
when making trust judgements, this suggests that they have an understanding about the
relationship between honesty and trust. As mentioned by Crossman and Talwar (2011),
that by middle childhood, poor development of conscience, weak self-regulatory
control, and antisocial behavior is related to the chronic reliance on lying.
According to Kuehn (2021) there are five reasons to teach moral values in
schools as early as elementary, which are, to prepare the children for their future roles
3
in society, many parents don't teach moral values, to provide an alternative top
dishonesty and violence that they see, to counter the bad influences in society, and that
these values will stick to them for life. Now this relates to the development of
academic integrity of learners as according to the study of Gamage et. al. (2020),
“academic integrity is meant to equip students with the competences and values
necessary to engage in ethical scholarship while assessment security focuses on
securing assessment against cheating, and on detecting any cheating that may have
occurred.”
Thus, the purpose of this study now is to analyze the Grade 5 pupils of Solano
South Central School, an elementary institution, of their academic dishonesty during
the Modular Distance Learning. By focusing our study on academic dishonesty, the
results the researchers gather can be of use for the perceptions of the viewers as this
study includes the awareness and extent of practice of the forms of academic
dishonesty, and what do the teachers do to prevent this occurrence from happening.
Grade 5 pupils are chosen as they are generally around 10-11 years old in the
Philippines, this in Piaget’s’ stages of cognitive development is the concrete
operational stage. It is described in this theory that children at age 7-11 are able to
think about how others see them and understand that other people have unique
perspectives (Cherry, 2021). Another theory that can describe children in this age is
Ericksons’ stages of psychosocial development wherein the children at this age begin
to compare themselves with others, this now develops their sense of pride and
accomplishment or they may feel inferior and inadequate. In terms of morality,
according to Kohlberg’s’ theory of moral development, children at this age want the
approval of others, they will avoid acts that will earn disapproval (LumenLearning,
n.d.). From these characteristics of Grade 5 pupils, they are expected to be more honest
in answering the study. Another reason is that there is a scarcity of studies focused on
pupils or elementary learners as most focus on higher level education. As it is unsure
when will the face-to-face setting of education will return, this study will help in
gathering and analyzing information of teachers’ perception of academic dishonesty
and the learner’s academic integrity in this period of modular distance learning setting.
This includes the reasons of why they possibly commit academic dishonesty and
actions taken by faculty to prevent such things from happening. With this information,
it can help further improve the awareness of teachers on their learners in regards to
academic dishonesty in modular distance learning, test the recommendations of other
teachers and possibly formulate preventive measures to maintain a trustworthy
academic integrity.
Conceptual and Analytical Framework

Academic Integrity
Academic integrity is not a new subject. As such, research summaries and

literature reviews have periodically appeared over the last 20 years. These studies
demonstrate that while concepts and reasons for ensuring academic integrity remain
4
relatively constant, environments for learning are dramatically different in today’s

digitally enhanced version of higher education (McHaney, 2011).
According to the International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) (2021),

academic integrity is having commitment to six important values which are honesty,
trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. By abiding these values, learners
and faculty members alike creates an effective scholarly community where integrity is
a cornerstone. If these values are not upheld, then the scholastic works of the learners,
researchers, and faculty members lose their credibility.
Furthermore, according to the University of North Carolina (n.d.), “Academic
integrity is the commitment to and demonstration of honest and moral behavior in an
academic setting. This is most relevant at the university level as it relates to providing
credit to other people when using their ideas. In simplest terms, it requires
acknowledging the contributions of other people. Failure to provide such
acknowledgement is considered plagiarism.”
Therefore, academic integrity is an important factor in academic setting as the
absence of an honest, moral environment, educational activities, such as research and
work to earn diplomas, certificates, and degrees, lose their value for students and
society at large. It is essential in any teaching-learning process focused on achieving
the highest standards of excellence and learning (ICAI, 2021).
Academic Dishonesty
The term now which correlates with academic integrity is academic dishonesty
which refers to the acts that violate the academic integrity values. Academic
misconduct is a construct that encompasses multiple forms of academic deviance
including but not limited to test cheating, plagiarism, and inappropriate collaboration.
Academic dishonesty is defined by Kibler (1993) as “forms of cheating and plagiarism
that involve students giving or receiving unauthorized assistance in an academic
exercise or receiving credit for work that is not their own.” Supporting this is Burke’s
(1997) investigation of the different forms of academic dishonesty where according to
Burke, cheating is “intentionally using or attempting to use unauthorized materials,
information, or study aids in any academic exercise.” He defines fabrication as
“intentional and unauthorized falsification or invention of any information or citation
in an academic exercise.” Facilitating academic dishonesty is defined as “intentionally
or knowingly helping or attempting to help another to commit an act of academic
dishonesty,” and plagiarism is defined as “intentionally or knowingly representing the
word of another as one’s own in any academic exercise.”
From the previous works of Cizek (2003); Whitley, Jr. and Keith-Spiegel, (2002)
regarding academic dishonesty, NIU (n.d.) has defined academic dishonesty as
“committing or contributing to dishonest acts by those engaged in teaching, learning,
research, and related academic activities, and it applies not just to students, but to
everyone in the academic environment.” Furthermore, they identified some of the
forms of academic dishonesty based from the works of Whitley and Keith-Spigel
5
(2002), Pavela (1978), Stern and Havelick (1986), which can be broadly classified as
cheating, plagiarism, fabrication or falsification, and sabotage.
The findings of McCabe et al. (2002) and Smyth and Davis (2004) suggest that
despite knowing the policies prohibiting academic dishonesty, cheating is still a
common behavior in most institutions. McCabe et al. (2002) also found that academic
dishonesty’s best predictor is the students’ perceptions of peers’ behavior, this means
regardless of an honor code, the student merely follows what their peers are doing.
McCabe and his co-authors argue that the academic culture is the primary driver of
cheating perceptions and academic dishonesty.
Various researchers now have found that when the students perceive that other
are cheating and the school's faculty members are doing nothing about it, this gives
them the justification to cheat (Bowers, 1964; Kaufmann et al., 2005; McCabe, 1992;
McCabe et al., 1999). Thus, students’ perceptions about the culture of integrity at a
school, their perceptions and suspicions regarding cheating will impact the chances
that they will engage in academic dishonesty as a viable tool to use in their academic
careers.
Relationship Between Academic Integrity and Dishonesty
According to the Harvard College Honor Code (n.d.), works which adheres to the
intellectual and scholarly standards of appropriate collection and use of data,
attribution of sources, and clear acknowledgement of the contribution of others to our
ideas, interpretations, conclusions, and discovery, is an academic work of integrity. On
the other hand, academic dishonesty is cheating on exams or problem sets, falsification
of data, misinterpretation of ideas, plagiarizing, taking works of others as one’s own,
and any academically dishonest acts.
With these past studies as the foundation, our study is going to find out the
academic integrity of the Grade 5 pupils. Including here is finding the perception of
their adviser about his/her pupils’ Academic Dishonesty and what are the
measurements and recommendations to keep the results trustworthy.
Modular Distance Learning
With the presence of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has impeded the flow of
education momentarily. However, with the quick action of the government they have
formulated ways to continue the education. One of which is Modular Distance
Learning (MDL). According to the DepEd (2020), they have adapted MDL which
made use of Self-Learning Modules (SLM) which is an ideal learning resource for
distance learning where the teacher is unable to give constant instructional supervision
and guidance unlike regular classroom setting. Furthermore, DepEd Secretary Leonor
Briones said, “The SLMs and the other alternative learning delivery modalities are in
place to address the needs, situations, and resources of each and every learner and will
cover all the bases in ensuring that basic education will be accessible amid the present
crisis posed by COVID-19.”
6
According to DepEd (2020), Self-Learning Modules have been used by DepEd

for Alternative Delivery Mode during disasters or situations like this pandemic where
learners encounter difficulty for daily attendance. Now with the COVID-19, SLMs are
compelled to be used on a large scale. Considering the unequal access to technology
among learners along with the preference of modular learning by their survey
response, SLMs have become the backbone of distance learning mechanism, assisted
by textbooks, other learning modalities, and online and educational televisions and
radio. Furthermore, modular distance learning is not an arbitrary decision but based on
the result of DepEd’s National Learner Enrolment and Survey Forms, wherein 8.8
million out of the 22.2 million enrollees preferred modular distance learning. However,
a question now arises whether the academic integrity is observed and are the results
from the Modular Distance Learning modality trustworthy.
DepEd Memorandum
As academic dishonesty became more apparent, the Department of Education has
implemented DepEd Memorandum DM-OUCI-2021-395 which addresses academic
dishonesty and promotes academic honesty. According to the Llego (n.d.), the DepEd
memorandum has cited the definition of academic dishonesty as conducts that obstruct
the evaluation of the learner’s progress. To push through the eradication of forms of
academic dishonesty, the memorandum included and encourages actions to protect
academic integrity. The memorandum also admitted to the limitations of managing
assessment however, it is still highly encouraged to teach academic integrity.
This framework shows the overall outline of the study by using the input-
process-output framework.
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
Respondents Collection of data Assessment of

through: Pupils’ Academic
Advisers
Dishonesty in
A. Questionnaire
Pupils Modular Distance
B. Online interview Learning modality.
Education Modality:
Tabulation of learners’ Measurements and
Modular Distance recommendations of
responses.
Learning teachers.
Analysis and
interpretation of the
Academic results.
Dishonesty Survey
7
Figure 1. Research Paradigm of the Study
Figure 1 shows the research paradigm of the study. The input shows respondents
which are the advisers and pupils, next is the independent variable which is the
Modular Distance Learning, and lastly the survey which is to be taken to determine
their academic integrity of the pupils. The research process includes administering
questionnaires and online interviews, tabulation of students’ responses and analysis
and interpretation of the results. The output is the finalization of the results which is
the Assessment of Pupils’ Academic Integrity in Modular Distance Learning modality
as well as the measures taken by the teachers and their recommendations.
Statement of the Problem
This study aims to analyze the academic dishonesty during the modular distance
learning method on the new normal education program of the Grade 5 pupils in the
Solano South Central School, Solano, Nueva Vizcaya.
Specifically, it seeks to give light to the following questions:
1. What is the pupils’ level of awareness of the different behaviors of academic
dishonesty?
2. What is the pupils' extent of the practice of the different behaviors of academic
dishonesty?
3. How do teachers identify and handle the behaviors of academic dishonesty
committed by the pupils?
4. What interventions can be recommended to handle academic dishonesty among
the pupils?
8
Chapter 2
METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The study utilized a mixed-methods approach, using a concurrent triangulation
design where the quantitative and qualitative data is gathered from separate groups of
respondents and the analysis is completed separately also. The study used descriptive-
survey design, which revealed the pupils’ level of awareness and extent of practice of
the different behaviors of academic dishonesty through a Likert-type questionnaire,
and the teachers’ way of identifying these behaviors through an open-ended
questionnaire and informal interview for follow-up.
Research Environment
This study is conducted at Solano South Central School (SSCS), Solano, Nueva
Vizcaya. It is a public school and managed by the government, therefore following
instruction of DepEd. In this, the school is following one of the recommended teaching
settings which is the Modular Distance Learning.
Research Respondents
The population of this study is all the Grade 5 pupils and their advisers in Solano
South Central School, Solano, Nueva Vizcaya during the Modular Distance Learning
of School Year 2021-2022. All sections in SSCS follow heterogeneity of sectioning as
encouraged in basic education. The study gathered from at least 30 pupils who have
submitted their modules at the end of the First Quarter, and the advisers of grade 5.
Research Instrument
The researchers modified the questionnaire adapted from the 'Academic Integrity
Survey’ of Don McCabe to gather required data for the level of pupils’ academic
integrity in modular distance learning. The questionnaire items were arranged based on
their category and the table is separated. Statements were also rephrased to the level of
the respondents. This survey used a variety of questions using Likert-scale,
dichotomous question, contingency question, and an open-ended question. The
interview questionnaire for the teachers is modified questionnaire adapted from
‘Factors Affecting Students’ Academic Dishonesty: from the Lecturers’ Perspectives’
Bangi and Selangor (n.d.) that focuses on the perspective of the adviser in terms of
academic dishonesty, the measurements that they have used to keep the authenticity of
score and how they identify such behaviors of academic dishonesty. The modification
done is retaining the open-ended questions, adapting the context, and removing
anything else. The questions included the consent of the participant, particularly
questions regarding their agreement of the proposed project.
Data Gathering Procedure
9
To address the research problems, the study followed a process. The study workflow is
illustrated below.
Modification of Preparation for
the questionnaire Validation of
and interview respondents’
Questionnaires
guide consent
Analysis and Gathering of data

Interpretation Data Tabulation through questionnaire
online and offline
Figure 2. General Outline of the Study (Procedural Flowchart)
Modification of the Questionnaire and Interview guide. Modification of questions

is done to fit the description of the respondents.
Validation of Questionnaires. After the modification of the questions, the
questionnaire is validated by the research adviser, panel members and data analysts,
whether it is ready to be used.
Preparation for the interview. After seeking ethical approval, informed consent is
prepared in a language understood by the participants. The objective and the consent is
explained further to the participants, and they are also informed that their identity is
confidential. Simple definitions of terms are also provided for easier understanding.
All of this is included on the questionnaire given.
Gathering of data through questionnaires online (Google forms) and offline. The
questionnaire is available online and offline for both pupils and teachers. For pupils,
the researchers coordinated with the teachers in distributing the questionnaire for the
pupils, where they are given an option to answer the paper questionnaire or via online.
The pupils are randomly selected. For teachers, they are asked to answer the
questionnaire prepared for them. The questionnaire is collected within the given set of
time (est. August-November).
Data Tabulation. After the data from pupils' questionnaires are gathered it is tabulated
for analysis and interpretation.
Analysis and Interpretation. The researchers analyzed the collected data and
augmented it through analysis of supplementary text including the weighted mean,
percentage, and Likert scale.
Treatment of Data
For the quantitative data, statistical methods are used to answer the specific
problems of this study where means and standard deviations will be used. The
10
interpretation of the means for the level of awareness and extent of practice will be as
follows:
Table 1
Mean Ranges Interpretations
Level of Awareness Mean Ranges Extent of Practice
Not at all Aware 1.00-1.80 Never
Slightly Aware 1.81 - 2.60 Rarely
Moderately Aware 2.61 - 3.40 Sometimes
Very Aware 3.41 - 4.20 Often
Extremely Aware 4.21 - 5.00 Always
After figuring out the level of awareness and extent of practice they are further
compared to see the seriousness of academic dishonesty.
For the qualitative data, the researchers choose a descriptive method to gather
data through an open-ended survey to the teachers to know and determine the
measurements used by teachers in preparing modular learning and their recommended
interventions on how to handle the academic dishonesty of pupils.
11
Chapter III
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Section 1. Pupils’ Level of Awareness on the Different Behaviors of Academic
Dishonesty
Table 2
Pupils’ Level of Awareness on the Different Behaviors of Academic Dishonesty
Different Behaviors of Academic Dishonesty Mean SD QD
1. Copying from another pupil during a test 1.97 1.377 Slightly

or exam. Aware
2. Using unpermitted things during a test or 2.07 1.285 Slightly
exam. (e.g. Cheat sheets or looking on the Aware
internet for answers.)
3. Getting questions or answers from 1.67 1.213 Not at all
someone who had already taken a test. aware
4. Using an electronic or digital device (e.g., 1.87 1.042 Slightly
cellphone/smartphone) as an unpermitted Aware
help during an exam.
5. Helping someone else cheat on a test. 1.83 1.367 Slightly
Aware
6. Reading a shortened or summarized 1.83 .648 Slightly
version of a literature (e.g., books, story, Aware
poems) rather than the original.
7. Reading literature in your own language 1.77 .626 Not at all
instead of what was told. (e.g., reading aware
Filipino work even though it is told to
read the English version.)
8. Passing a work copied from another 1.70 1.368 Not at all
pupil. aware
9. Passing an assignment on which the 1.67 1.061 Not at all
parents did most of the work. aware
10. Working on an assignment with other 1.63 .890 Not at all
pupils when the teacher asked for aware
individual work.
12

11. Claiming participation for group work 1.77 1.223 Not at all
when the pupil really didn't contribute. aware
12. Copying a few sentences from a site on 1.77 .898 Not at all
the Internet without citing them in a paper aware
or assignment submitted.
13. Copying a few sentences from a book, 1.73 .785 Not at all
magazine, or other source without citing aware
them in a paper or assignment submitted.
14. Letting another pupil copy your 1.70 1.236 Not at all
homework. aware
15. Submitting a paper that was taken in large 1.80 1.031 Not at all
part from a website or from a book, aware
journal or other written source.
16. Pretending to be sick to postpone taking a 1.50 .861 Not at all
test/handing in an assignment. aware
17. Claiming of passing in a paper or project 1.47 .900 Not at all
when you had not done so. aware
18. Selling, buying, or distributing in some 1.70 1.236 Not at all
other way, test or exam copies or aware
questions, essays, or class notes.
Overall Mean on Awareness 1.7463 .86506 Not at all
aware
Legend: 1.00-1.80 Not at all aware 2.61-3.40 Moderately aware 4.21-5.00Extremely aware
1.81-2.60 Slightly aware 3.41-4.20 Very aware
It is shown in Table 2 the awareness of respondents in the different behaviors of

academic dishonesty. As seen on the table, the statement “Using unpermitted things
during a test or exam. (e.g. Cheat sheets or looking on the internet for answers.)'' has the
highest mean of 2.07 (s=1.285) which means that among the items under the awareness
of different behavior, this is the top among the behaviors that they are slightly aware of as
a form of academic dishonesty. It is followed by the item, “Copying from another pupil
during a test or exam.” with a mean of 1.97 (s=1.377). On the other hand, the behavior
with least awareness is from the item, “Claiming of passing in a paper or project when
you had not done so.” with a mean of 1.47 (s=0.900) which means that among the
different behaviors, they are not at all aware and least aware as well that it is considered
an act of academic dishonesty. It is followed by, “Pretending to be sick to postpone
taking a test/handing in an assignment.” with a mean of 1.50 (s=0.861).
Overall, the awareness of different behaviors as academic dishonesty turned out to
be that the respondents are not at all aware that the different behaviors listed is a form of
academic dishonesty, M=1.7463, s=0.86506.
13
This suggests that the respondents have low to no awareness that the behaviors
listed are forms of academic dishonesty. Indeed, without proper orientation and
information, learners will remain oblivious of what not to do, as from personal
experience, most teachers turn a blind eye regarding such behaviors and most public
elementary schools do not have a handbook regarding rules and regulations. During this
time of the pandemic where teacher presence is greatly affected and lacking, the findings
imply an alarming situation in the early years of formal education as these are supposed
to be the building years of learners in understanding academic dishonesty.
This is supported by Naumeca et al. (2020) where in the findings demonstrated a
low degree of student awareness of the institution’s academic integrity policy and a lack
of a systematic institutional strategy to academic integrity promotion. This finding also
gives stronger support to the role of elementary school teachers forwarded by the
Children’s World Academy (2021), that as elementary school teachers, the first
responsibility is to raise student knowledge of academic integrity and the significance of
associated ideas that includes academic dishonesty.
Section 2. Pupils’ Extent of Practice of the Different Behaviors of Academic
Dishonesty
Table 3
Pupils’ Extent of Practice of the Different Behaviors of Academic Dishonesty
1. I copied from another pupil during a test 1.27 .583 Never

or exam
2. I used unpermitted things during a test or 1.40 .621 Never
exam. (e.g. Cheat sheets or looking on the
internet for answers.)
3. I got questions or answers from someone 1.27 .583 Never
who had already taken a test.
4. I am using an electronic or digital device 1.40 .621 Never
(e.g., cellphone/smartphone) during an
exam.
5. I helped someone else cheat on a test. 1.07 .254 Never
6. I read a shortened or summarized version 1.60 .675 Never
of a literature (e.g., books, story, poems)
rather than the original.
7. I read literature in Filipino instead of 1.63 .809 Never
what was told. (e.g., reading Filipino
work even though it is told to read the
English version.)
14

8. I passed a work I copied from another 1.10 .305 Never
pupil.
9. I passed an assignment on which my 1.57 .679 Never
parents did most of the work.
10. I worked on an assignment with other 1.23 .504 Never
pupils when the teacher asked for
individual work.
11. I claimed participation for group work 1.17 .461 Never
when I really didn't contribute.
12. I copied a few sentences from a site on 1.80 .805 Never
the Internet without citing them in a paper
or assignment I submitted.
13. I copied a few sentences from a book, 1.63 .850 Never
magazine, or other source without citing
them in a paper or assignment I
submitted.
14. I let another pupil copy my homework. 1.30 .702 Never
15. I submitted a paper that is taken in large 1.60 .855 Never
part from a website or from a book,
journal or other written source.
16. I pretended to be sick to postpone taking 1.10 .305 Never
a test/handing in an assignment.
17. I claimed to hand in a paper or project 1.20 .407 Never
when I had not done so.
18. I sold, purchased, or distributed in some 1.13 .434 Never
other way, test or exam copies or
Overall Mean on Practice 1.3593 .35490 Never
Legend: 1.00-1.80 Never 2.61-3.40 Sometime s4.21-5.00 Always
1.81-2.60 Rarely 3.41-4.20 Often
It is shown in Table 3 the extent of practice of the different behaviors of academic

dishonesty by the respondents. As seen on the table, the statement “I copied a few
sentences from a site on the Internet without citing them in a paper or assignment I
submitted.” resulted in the highest mean of 1.80 (s=0.805) which means that among the
items under the extent of practice of the different behaviors, this is top among the extent
of practice that the pupils never do. Being at the top means it is the most frequent
compared to other items, and that copying from Internet resources is the most common
15
practice of academic dishonesty of the pupils. It is followed by the item, “I read

literature in Filipino instead of what was told. (e.g., reading Filipino work even though it
is told to read the English version.)” with a mean of 1.63 (s=0.809). On the other hand,
the behavior with the least extent of practice is the item, “I helped someone else cheat on
a test.” with a mean of 1.07 (s=0.254) which means that among the different behaviors,
they never practice such behavior of academic dishonesty. This could be due to the fact
that the pupils are physically separated from each other. It is followed by the item, “I
pretended to be sick to postpone taking a test/handing in an assignment.” with a mean of
1.10 (s=0.305).
Overall, the extent of practice of the different behaviors of academic dishonesty
turned out to be that the respondent never practiced the different behaviors listed,
M=1.3593, s=0.34590.
This suggests that of the various behaviors of academic dishonesty, copying some
answers from the internet is the most common way that learners practice academic
dishonesty. Indeed, so as it is currently the easiest and most convenient way to access
information as in essence some of the data answers the assessment tasks. This is quite
similar to the findings of Bachore (2016) where 62.5% of the respondents are copying
from the internet.
Table 4
Pupils’ Sources of Copied Material without Citing
Sources of Copied Material Frequency Percent
1. Online resources only through the 15 50.0
Internet
2. Print resources only such as book, 3 10.0
encyclopedia, newspaper, etc.
3. Both online and print resources 12 40.0
Total 30 100.0
Table 4 shows the pupils sources of copied materials without citing according to
the means through internet, print sources, or both online. Of the choices, the majority of
the pupils have chosen copied materials through online resources through the internet
(50%), followed by both online and print resources (40%), and lastly, through print
resources only (10%). Through the data, the researchers inferred that the majority
preferred online resources through the Internet which is parallel to the findings in Table 3
that using Internet sources is the most common but generally never done by the
respondents. This is quite similar to the findings of McCabe (2009) wherein 87% of the
participants indicated the Internet as the primary method to access plagiarism. This is
further explored by Witherspoon et.al. (2010) wherein contemporary ways namely
16
internet based is much preferred, however it was noted that the respondents would use
what is available either way.
Table 5
Likelihood of Pupils’ Reporting of Incidents of Academic Dishonesty
How likely is it that: Mean SD QD
1. You would report an incident of 2.23 .935 Unlikely
academic dishonesty (cheat,
plagiarism, falsification, or
sabotage) that you observed?
2. A pupil at Solano South Central 2.20 1.031 Unlikely
School would report such
violations?
3. A pupil would report a close 2.07 .907 Unlikely
friend?
Legend: 1.00-1.49 Very Unlikely 2.50-3.49 Likely
1.50-2.49 Unlikely 3.50-4.00 Very Likely
As seen from Table 5, among the likelihood of reporting incidents of academic

dishonesty, the statement “You would report an incident of academic dishonesty (cheat,
plagiarism, falsification, or sabotage) that you observed?” had the highest mean of 2.23
(s=0.935) which put it on top on the likelihood of reporting an incident with the
qualitative description of unlikely. This is followed by the statement “A pupil at Solano
South Central School would report such violations?” with a mean of 2.20 (s=1.031). The
least likelihood of reporting an incident is the statement “A pupil would report a close
friend?” with the mean of 2.07 (s=0.907).
Overall, the likelihood that the respondents would report an incident of academic
dishonesty, is that as of now, they would unlikely report an incident of academic
dishonesty. This suggests that it is unlikely that pupils would report any acts of academic
dishonesty that they have observed, especially in the current learning modality where
they do not really communicate that much to each other, much less observe others
practicing acts of academic dishonesty. This is supported by the findings of Bachore
(2016) where 71.6% of the respondents would not report such incidents.
17
Table 6
Circumstances of Pupils that Justify Academic Dishonesty in their Minds
Which of the following circumstances YES NO
justifies academic dishonesty in your
f % f %
mind?
More than half the class is doing it. 10 33.3 20 66.7
Test is too hard or there’s too much work. 14 46.7 16 53.3
Pupil is involved in many school 10 33.3 20 66.7

activities.
Will not be able to pass without cheating. 12 40.0 18 60.0
Concerned about class rank. 11 36.7 19 63.3
It’s never justified. 6 20.0 24 80.0
Learning material is 6 20.0 24 80.0

irrelevant/unimportant.
Pupil involved in many outside activities 7 23.3 23 76.7
like household chores
Teacher hasn’t made policy clear 8 26.7 22 73.3
Pressured to get good grades. 16 53.3 14 46.7
Needed extra points to raise my grade 10 33.3 20 66.7

average.
18
The table depicts the factors that motivate students to engage in academic
cheating. Among the justifications listed, 53% of the pupils disclosed that the “pressure
to get good grades” justifies their act of academic dishonesty. Next is, 46% of the pupils
justified their act with the reason that the “test is too hard or there’s too much work.” The
least justifiable reason where 20% of pupils have chosen is that “the learning material is
irrelevant/unimportant.” This is similar to the percentage of pupils who mentioned that
academic dishonesty is never justified.
The findings of this table are quite similar to the findings of Bachore (2016),
where according to his studies, the highest is both pressured to get good grades and the
test is too hard or too much work. However, based on the findings of Balbuena and
Lamela (2015), the primary reason for resorting to academic dishonesty is due to the
academic procrastination of the learners followed by the drive to get high grades. Further,
as mentioned by O’Connor (2015), “some students appear to be keen, in true
Machiavellian style, to pass their subjects by any means possible.” Meaning using
whatever means necessary to achieve their desire.
Table 7
Agreement of the Pupils to the Academic Dishonesty Status of their School
How strongly do you agree or Mean SD QD
disagree with the following
statements?
1. Academic dishonesty is a 2.60 1.037 Disagree
serious problem at Solano
South Central School.
2. The investigation of suspected 2.70 .952 Not Sure
incidents of academic
dishonesty is fair and impartial
at Solano South Central School.
3. Teachers at Solano South 2.63 1.159 Not Sure
Central School are observant in
discovering and reporting
suspected cases of academic
dishonesty.
Legend: 1.00-1.80 Strongly Disagree 2.61-3.40 Not Sure 4.21-5.00 Strongly Agree
1.81-2.60 Disagree 3.41-4.20 Agree
From what can be seen on Table 7, the statement with the most uncertain with the
statement “The investigation of suspected incidents of academic dishonesty is fair and
19
impartial at Solano South Central School.” with a mean of 2.70 (s=0.952). This is
followed by the statement “Teachers at Solano South Central School are observant in
discovering and reporting suspected cases of academic dishonesty.” with a mean of 2.63
(s=1.159). On the other hand, the least agreeable statement was “Academic dishonesty is
a serious problem at Solano South Central School.” with a mean of 2.60 (s=1.037).
Overall, the respondents are uncertain about the academic dishonesty status of the
school. This suggests that the pupils are not informed and knowledgeable regarding the
problem of academic dishonesty at their school, thus the findings have indicated that they
are not sure. Indeed, they would not know whether the problem of academic dishonesty is
serious or monitored in their school as in their current learning modality it is difficult for
them to perceive it and acts of intervention are more discreet now. This is supported by
Saana et. al. (2016) findings where in seriousness is relative to the agreement of the party,
where they consider it an offense when they did not have the permission. On the other
hand, the findings of Alsuwaileh et. al. (2016), contradicts the findings as it is mentioned
in their study that students believed that academic dishonesty is very common in their
school and that the certainty of detection is relatively low.
Section 3. How Teachers Identify and Handle the Behaviors of Academic Dishonesty
Committed by the Pupils
Table 8
How frequently have you seen the Mean SD QD
following behaviors of pupils occur in
your class
1. Plagiarizing on written 3.40 1.140 Often
assignments
2. Inappropriately sharing work in 3.20 1.095 Sometimes
group assignments
3. Cheating during tests or 2.60 1.517 Rarely
examinations
Academic Environment of the School in terms of Academic Dishonesty
Legend: 1.00-1.80 Never 3.41-4.20 Often

1.81-2.60 Rarely 4.21-5.00 Always
2.61-3.40 Sometimes
Table 8 shows the frequency of occurrence of the stated behaviors observed by

the teachers in their class. Based on the means, the teachers often see plagiarism on the
written assignments of the pupils which has the highest mean (M=3.40, s=1.140),
followed by inappropriate sharing work in group assignments (M=3.20, s=1.095). The
item with the lowest mean is cheating during tests or examinations (M=2.60, s=1.517).
20
Overall, the teacher sometimes observes the indicated behaviors in the works of
their class. This suggests that despite the results of the “Table 3” indicating that the pupils
never committed the behaviors stated, the results of the observation of the teachers say
otherwise. However, as the results of table 3 are measured by means, it does not signify
the answer of individuals. This is unlike the findings of Bachore (2016), as according to
his studies, the behaviors cheating on tests examination is always observed, and
plagiarism on written assignments and inappropriately sharing work in groups is
frequently observed. Additionally, it is interesting to observe that the perception of the
severity of cheating, plagiarizing or using any kind of unauthorized help does not have a
significant impact on the ethical behavior self-reported by the respondents. Therefore, it
can be assumed that it is not as important to point out the severity of a specific act of
academic dishonesty to influence the ethical behavior of students and professionals, but
rather to emphasize the severity of the misconduct that is associated with any act of
academic dishonesty (Escorza et al. 2020). However, it is recognized that deliberate
dishonesty, driven by a desire for better grades, is an oft-cited cause of plagiarism and
that some students who avoided discussion of their plagiarized essay in this study may
have done so because of fraudulent intentions (Straw 2002).
Major Reason Some Pupils Do Academic Dishonesty
Given that the teachers sometimes too often see academic dishonesty in the
current learning modality, two out of five teacher-respondents see pressure and
expectation from the parents to have high grades and good academic standing as a reason
for the pupils to commit academic dishonesty. The reason associated with parents is
critical because according to Rowland (2007), for teachers, academic dishonesty is a
moral issue and parents are highly responsible for the moral training of their children.
They also mentioned peer influence, laziness in studying, lack of self-discipline and low
self-esteem. Students cheat for a variety of reasons, according to the research, including
peer/group pressure, defying the teacher, low marks compared to perceived effort, fear of
disappointing others with low results, tough tasks, poor time management skills, and just
believing they can do it (Yeo, 2007).
Reporting a Pupil for Academic Dishonesty
Despite admitting that they sometimes see behaviors of academic dishonesty,
three out of five did not report a pupil for academic dishonesty. But this can be possible
and acceptable because these teachers can handle these behaviors. Campbell (2019)
suggested three ways academic dishonesty can be prevented through advocating
academic dishonesty. These ways are teaching and utilizing the vocabulary of integrity,
cultivating an environment of kindness and respect, and emphasizing the importance of a
growth mindset, which are all possible even during the pandemic.
When the teachers were asked why they did not report the incidents, they
mentioned that they need to protect the integrity of the learners and they talk to the
learners first, which means that they handle the situations by themselves.
21
Administratively, this is proper as issues must be handled at the lowest level first before
proceeding to higher ups.
Catching Incidents of Academic Dishonesty among Their Pupils
It was mentioned previously that the teacher-respondents sometimes too often see
academic dishonesty. When asked if they caught incidents of such, three out of five
answered “No”, but when asked what they will do once they know a pupil committed
academic dishonesty, the same answer surfaced where they will talk to the pupil first but
in various ways and descriptions. One will remind not to repeat such incidence while
another will present the consequences. Using consequences as an approach is related with
the idea that academic dishonesty is a moral issue (Children’s World Academy, 2021)
and that the pupils they are talking with might still be under the preconventional of
Kohlberg’s Moral Development where children behave based on the standards of the
adults and the consequences of breaking those standards (McLeod, 2013). The teacher-
respondents also shared about having heart-to-heart talk with the pupil, calling the
parents’ attention, and teaching the value of honesty in learning and in real life.
Most Common Ways in which Pupils Use New Technologies to Commit Academic
Dishonesty
When asked, the teacher-respondents gave out two common ways of how their
pupils use new technologies to commit academic dishonesty. The first, which is very
obvious from the results of the pupils, is on copying information from Internet resources.
According to Ison (2019), the Internet has always been implicated as a negative influence
to academic integrity. The second way is sharing answers to their classmates through
Messenger, which is the most common communication channel among Filipino students
and teachers (Arayata, 2021).
Academic Dishonesty Among Pupils in the Modular Learning
Four out of five teacher-respondents said “Yes” when asked if they think their
students commit academic dishonesty in the modular learning modality. This was done in
ways for the pupils to perfect their written test, to let their parents or siblings answer their
modules, and to copy directly from the answer key provided in the modules. When asked
why their pupils commit academic dishonesty, the same results surfaced on their answers
on the major reasons why pupils commit it. They mentioned grades, parents’
expectations, promotion to the next grade level, laziness, and lack of confidence in their
skills.
In a Rappler article by Estrada (2021), the effectiveness of self-learning modules
was questioned if they are effective or not. As a general principle, the modules should
include parts on motivation and assessment that serve as a comprehensive guide to the
required skills of both the instructor and students. Through home visits (following social
distancing standards) and feedback systems, the teachers will keep track of the student's
development and advise those who require extra care. But giving individual attention is
difficult. Gueta and Janer (2021) mentioned that some teachers find it difficult to go to
22
their learners’ home to monitor but with rare visits, they saw uninterested students which
explains laziness in accomplishing self-learning modules. This was also associated with
the challenge met by pupils and parents that the modules have a great number of
activities. With the pressure to finish, this could imply committing academic dishonesty.
These acts of academic dishonesty were identified by the teacher-respondents by
looking at their handwriting and having exactly the same score or output with their
classmates. Bernardo (2020) in ABS-CBN News website interviewed public school
teachers where the latter admitted that they are not sure if the students are really the ones
answering the modules, and that DepEd officials appeal to parents to refrain from
answering the modules for their children, admitting that such cases happen.
These acts of academic dishonesty were believed by the teacher-respondents to
impact the pupils, especially when not controlled. They believe that their learners may
become too dependent on parents, lazy, irresponsible, low performers and dishonest.
Ultimately, they see that academic dishonesty will give no learning at all, and eventually,
when face-to-face classes will be back, they will lack the knowledge, skills, and
confidence to learn again. According to Easton Country Day School (2022), academic
dishonesty can undermine the academic world. By allowing pupils to get by without
having to grasp the knowledge, it conflicts with education's primary objective of
knowledge transfer. Furthermore, academic dishonesty produces a hostile learning
environment, which has a negative impact on honest pupils.
Despite all this, the teacher-respondents still believe that this phenomenon can
still be resolved through online kumustahan, standard setting, and self-discipline.
Standard setting is similar to making an honor code shared by Ericksen (2021). She
mentioned that creating this honor code in remote learning at the beginning of the school
year or term can help set the stage and can make the learners more accountable. In
addition, one teacher-respondent mentioned that they give suggestions to higher officials
on how to handle this but did not specify. Another teacher-respondent said about making
honesty as a habit through the power of drill. But this will be difficult if not many
interactions happen between the teachers and the pupils.
Nevertheless, since academic dishonesty was already witnessed by the teacher-
respondents, they suggested some ways on how to handle such. Two said about calling
the attention of the parent or guardian, and another two shared about giving students time
to reflect on what they did and on the value of honesty. One said he does not know.
However, their responses advocate metacognition as an activity to reduce such. Simmons
(2018) said that this strategy can be helpful for learners to process their goals,
motivations, and actions. Teachers, even physically absent from their learners, must
know their learners’ goals and use these as points of reflections for them to avoid
committing academic dishonesty since such actions could lead to poor actual
performance, and lack of knowledge and skills that they need to attain their goals.
23
In summary, academic dishonesty occurs among the student-respondents of this

study and their teachers see this phenomenon caused by several reasons and can be
handled in various ways.
CHAPTER IV
Conclusions and Recommendations
Conclusions
In the light of the findings gathered in this study, there were several conclusions
derived. First, the grade 5 pupils of Solano South Central School are not knowledgeable
or informed regarding academic dishonesty. Though the pupils are slightly aware of some
of the behaviors which are commonly seen and advised against by teachers in face-to-
face modality. This could reflect the limited attention and importance given in developing
awareness regarding different behaviors of academic dishonesty. Second, the extent of
practice of the different behaviors of academic dishonesty of the pupils indicates that they
have never practiced academic dishonesty. This, however, is not in accordance with the
answers by the teachers. This may be the effect of the current modality without the
supervision of the teachers and the covert approval of the guardians or parents.
Moreover, the grade 5 teachers at Solano South Central School identify pupils
committing academic dishonesty through their handwritings, the complexity of answers
beyond their level, followed by the similarities of scores and answers. This identification
may be limited due to the fact that they could not directly supervise their pupils and
chosen modality of education.
Additionally, based on the findings, the recommended interventions by the
teachers to handle academic dishonesty primarily focuses on the premise of being caught
before taking an action as there is no direct dissemination of information regarding
academic dishonesty. But this kind of solution is flawed, as instead of raising awareness
to prevent academic dishonesty from happening, they just address as it occurs. The
approach recommended is also indirect and a form of advice, therefore no guarantee that
the offender will not continue.
Recommendations
24
Based on the summary of findings and conclusions derived in this study, the
following recommendations are strongly advanced. Administrators should communicate
and coordinate with the teachers to make a clear regulation in doing the self-learning
modular distance learning activities and tasks. Module Writers should include brief
instructions and regulations regarding academic dishonesty and integrity as much as
possible in every beginning of the module or to be inserted in every learning activity
sheets. Teachers should not condone any academic dishonesty behaviors observed and
should contact the parents or guardians of the said offender and discuss what is to be
done. Raise the awareness of academic dishonesty and provide student handbooks that
includes matters of academic dishonesty. Teachers should provide a short webinar to both
pupils and parents to discuss about the forms of academic dishonesty and consequences
so that pupils will as much as possible read and do the self-learning modules and only
seek help from their parents and guardians. Thus, parents are to strictly assist only as they
are the facilitator of the learners learning as of the distance learning. Future Researchers
can explore on the teachers’ side, the issues encountered during the distance learning,
interventions made, and results of interventions.
References
Ahmed, K. (2018). Student Perceptions of Academic Dishonesty in a Private Middle
Eastern University. Higher Learning Research Communications, 8(1).
https://doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v8i1.400
Alsuwaileh, B. G. (2015, November 30). ERIC - EJ1118938 - Academic Dishonesty: A
Mixed-Method Study of Rational Choice among Students at the College of Basic
Education in Kuwait, Journal of Education and Practice, 2016. ERIC.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1118938
Anohina-Naumeca, A., Birzniece, I., and Odiņeca, T. (2020). Students’ awareness of
the academic integrity policy at a Latvian university. International Journal for
Educational Integrity, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-020-00064-4
Bachore, M. M. (2015, November 30). ERIC - EJ1109249 - The Nature, Causes and
Practices of Academic Dishonesty/Cheating in Higher Education: The Case of
Hawassa University, Journal of Education and Practice, 2016. ERIC.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1109249
Balbuena, S. and Lamela, R. (2015). Prevalence, Motives, and Views of Academic
Dishonesty in Higher Education. ERIC. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?
id=ED575015
Department of education (2020, June 19). Adaptation of the Basic Education Learning
continuity Plan for School Year 2020-2021 in light of the COVID-19 Public
Health Emergency. Retrieved from
https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/DO_s2020_012.pdf
25
Department of Education (2020, July 20). Policy Guidelines for the Provision of
Learning Resources in the Implementation of Basic Education Learning
Continuity Plan. GOVPH. Retrieved from https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-
content/uploads/2020/08/DO_s2020_018.pdf
Ercegovac, Z. and Richardson, J. (2004). Academic Dishonesty, Plagiarism Included, in
the Digital Age: A Literature Review. BaruchCollege. Retrieved from
https://provost.baruch.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2019/11/
PlagiarismLiteratureReview.pdf
Factors affecting student motivation in distance education. Spider. Retrieved from
https://spidercenter.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/187/files/2012/01/FinalICDEBali20
12Factorsaffectingstudent.pdf
Gamage, K., de Silva, E., Gunawardhana, N., (2020). Online Delivery and Assessment
during COVID-19: Safeguarding Academic Integrity. ERIC. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1277113.pdf
Harvard University. Academic Integrity and Dishonesty. Retrieved July 16, 2021,
Retrieved from https://handbook.fas.harvard.edu/book/academic-integrity
Indrajeewa, A. (2021). The Impact Of Covid-19 On Education. Observer Education.
Retrieved from https://www.observereducation.lk/2021/06/29/the-impact-of-
covid-19-on-education/
International Center for Academic Integrity (2021). The Fundamental Values of
Academic Integrity. (3rd ed.). ICAI. Retrieved from https://academicintegrity.org
Journal of Information Systems Education, Vol. 27(3) Summer 2016. Academic
Integrity: Information Systems Education Perspective. Journal of Information
Systems Education (JISE). Retrieved from
https://jise.org/volume27/n3/JISEv27n3p153.pdf
Lifespan Development. (n.d). Cognitive Development in Middle Childhood. Retrieved
July 9, 2021, from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wmopen-
fespandevelopment/chapter/cognitive-development-in-middle-childhood/
Llego, M. A. (n.d.). DepEd Memorandum on Promoting Academic Honesty.
TeacherPh. Retrieved May 20, 2022, from https://www.teacherph.com/deped-
promoting-academic-honesty/
Karen, M., and Fong, C. (2020). Achievement Motivation and Academic Dishonesty: A
Meta-Analytic Investigation. SpringerLink. Retrieved from
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-020-09557-7
Kibler, W. (1993). Academic Dishonesty: A Student Development Dilemma, NASPA
Journal, 30:4, 252-267. Taylor and Francis Online. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1993.11072323
26
Kuehn, P. (2021). Moral Values for Students: A Necessary Part of the Curriculum.
Soapboxie. Retrieved from https://soapboxie.com/social-issues/Teaching-Moral-
Values-in-School-A-Necessary-Part-of-the-Curriculum
Manlangit, P., Paglumotan, A., and Sapera, S.(2020). Supercharging Filipino Parents is
Key for Successful Modular Distance Learning. PressReader.
https://www.pressreader.com/philippines/watchmen-daily-journal/20210504/281
517933984352
McCabe, D. L. (2009). Academic Dishonesty in Nursing Schools: An Empirical
Investigation. Journal of Nursing Education, 48(11), 614–623.
https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20090716-07
O’Connor, Z. (2014). Extreme Plagiarism: The Rise of the e-Idiot? The International
Journal of Learning in Higher Education, 22(1), 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.18848/2327-7955/cgp/v22i01/48718
Pe Dangle, Y.R., and Sumaoang, J. (2020). The Implementation of Modular Distance
Learning in the Philippine Secondary Public Schools. DPublication. Retrieved
from https://www.dpublication.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/27-427.pdf
Peled, Y., Eshet, Y., Barczyk, C., Grinautski, K., (2019) .Predictors of Academic
Dishonesty among undergraduate students in online and face-to-face courses.
ScienceDirect. Retrieved from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S036013151830112X
Samanta, A. (2018). ICT and Academic Integrity at Secondary Level. Retrieved from
http://www.wbnsou.ac.in/openjournals/Issue/1st-Issue/ICT%20and%20Academic
%20Integrity%20at%20Secondary%20Level.pdf
Satterlee, A. (2002). Academic Dishonesty among Students: Consequences and
Interventions. Eric. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED469468.pdf
Schleicher, A. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on education - Insights from Education
at a Glance 2020. OECD. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/the-
impact-of-covid-19-on-education-insights-education-at-a-glance-2020.pdf
Talwar, V., and Crossman, A. (2011). From little white lies to filthy liars: the evolution
of honesty and deception in young children. Advances in child development and
behavior, 40, 139–179. ScienceDirect. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-
386491-8.00004-9
University of North Carolina (n.d.). Academic Integrity. UNC. Retrieved from
https://writingcenter.unc.edu/esl/resources/academic-integrity/
Willis, K., and Alexander, E. (2019). Academic Dishonesty: Then and Now, A
Comparison. Kennesaw. Retrieved from
27
https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1456andcontext=ama_proceedings
Witherspoon, M., Maldonado, N., and Lacey, C. H. (2010). Academic Dishonesty of
Undergraduates: Methods of Cheating. Academic Dishonesty of Undergraduates:
Methods of Cheating. https://eric.ed.gov/?q=ED518485andid=ED518485
Xu, F., Evans, A. D., Li, C., Li, Q., Heyman, G., and Lee, K. (2013). The role of
honesty and benevolence in children’s judgments of trustworthiness.
International Journal of Behavioral Development, 37(3), 257–265. Sagepub.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025413479861
Zaccoletti, S., Camacho, A., Correia, N., Aguiar, C., Mason, L., Alves, R. A., and
Daniel, J. R. (2020). Parents' Perceptions of Student Academic Motivation
During the COVID-19 Lockdown: A Cross-Country Comparison. Frontiersin.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.592670
Northern Illinois University. Academic Dishonesty Definition and Types. Retrieved
July 16, 2021, from
https://www.niu.edu/academic-integrity/faculty/types/index.shtml
28
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Informed Consent Form
This form is for pupils and teachers in the Solano South Central School in their
participation to the research project entitled Analysis of Pupils Academic dishonesty in
Modular Distance Learning in the New Normal.
Name of Researchers: Roselyn D. Dawong

Organizational Affiliation: Saint Mary’s University

Department of Education
Information Sheet
You are being invited by student researchers from Saint Mary’s University to participate
in their study on the analysis of pupils’ academic dishonesty in modular distance
learning in the new normal the teachers’ opinion and recommendations on that matter.
You can take your time to decide whether to participate or not and you can ask questions
any time for any word or concept in this form that you may not understand.
29
The purpose of this study is to analyze the pupils’ level of awareness on the different
behaviors of academic dishonesty, the extent of practice of the different behaviors of
academic dishonesty, how the teachers identify and handle such behaviors, and what
interventions can be made.
This study involves the use of survey questionnaire that the respondents will answer in
Google Form. You are selected as participant because you belong to the Solano South
Central School Grade 5 pupils who have submitted their modules by the end of the first
quarter, and teachers. You are among the 60 pupils and 5 teachers, randomly selected
among the respondents. Please be informed that your participation is voluntary and you
can withdraw any time without explanation. Your non-participation or withdrawal will
not affect your standing as a pupil or a teacher.
Should you choose to participate in the study, you shall be answering a survey
questionnaire containing general demographic profile and items where you will reveal
whether for the pupils, is performing academic dishonesty and their awareness of
performing it, and for teachers’ their views on the matter. It is estimated that your
participation in the study will only take not more than 20 minutes.
There is no known risk in your participation to the study and there is no direct benefit to
you either. However, you will be contributing to the creation of new knowledge about
academic dishonesty in the new normal, modular distance learning, as a result of this
study may be beneficial to the school involved.
You shall not receive any payment for your participation nor any reimbursements. Even
if you have chosen to participate voluntarily, you have the right to refuse to continue and
any information you have already provided will not be used in the study. Rest assured
that your privacy will be respected and all your answers will be treated with utmost
confidentiality. The accomplished questionnaires will be retrieved only by the
researchers through the Google drive and your identity will be anonymized by providing
you a number code instead of your name/email. The data you provided will be
transferred to excel in number coded format. Except for the researchers, no one will be
able to identify you as respondent in this study. After the study is completed and finally
bound in a book, all the date in the Google drive will be deleted for good.
The results of this study may be disseminated within Saint Mary’s University through
student research fora. Also, the study may be submitted for publication in national or
international journals. For any matter concerning this study, you can contact Wendell
30
Lordwyn F. Ramos or Roselyn D. Dawong, through the following mobile number:

09451348384 or 09532975552, or by email: ramosbusinessmail@gmail.com or
dawongroselyn77@gmail.com.
Certificate of Consent
I have read the foregoing information, or it has been read to me. I have had the
opportunity to ask questions about it and any questions I have asked have been answered
to my satisfaction. By answering this, I consent voluntarily to be a participant in this
study.
Print Name of Participant (Optional): _________________

Signature of Participant: ___________________
Date: [MM/DD/YYYY]
Appendix B
Analysis of Pupils Academic dishonesty in Modular Distance Learning in the New

Normal
Dear Participant,
We invite you to participate in a research study entitled Analysis of Pupils
Academic dishonesty in Modular Distance Learning in the New Normal. We are
currently enrolled in the Student Teacher Education and Humanities at Saint Marys’
University in Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya, and we are in the process of writing our
Research. The purpose of the research is to determine the academic dishonesty during the
modular distance learning in the new normal.
The enclosed questionnaire has been designed to collect information on the level
of awareness and extent of practice of specific academic dishonesty behaviors.
Your participation in this research project is completely voluntary. You may
decline altogether, or leave blank any questions you don’t wish to answer. There are no
known risks to participation beyond those encountered in everyday life. Your responses
will remain confidential and anonymous. Data from this research will be kept under lock
and key and reported only as a collective combined total. No one other than the
researchers will know your individual answers to this questionnaire.
If you agree to participate in this project, please answer the questions on the
questionnaire as best you can. It should take approximately 5-10 minutes to complete.
31
This questionnaire is also available online for convenience. Please return the
questionnaire as soon as possible or during the return of the modules.
Thank you for your assistance in this important endeavor.
Sincerely yours,
Researchers,
Dawong, Roselyn D.
Ramos, Wendell Lordwyn F.
Research Adviser,
Bautista, Gerome H.
Definition of Terms
Academic dishonesty - is any action that obstructs the evaluation of a learner's progress
by misrepresenting the work being assessed and evaluated, as well as the learner's actual
knowledge (www.wpi.edu).
Cheating - an unauthorized use of information, materials, devices, sources, or practices
in completing academic activities. For example, copying another learner’s answers during
a test that should be done separately is considered cheating. Similarly, a learner who
allows another learner to copy his or her work is deemed to be aiding or contributing to
cheating
Plagiarism - a form of cheating in which someone takes another person's ideas, words,
design, art, music, or other works and passes them off as their own without
acknowledging the source or, if necessary, seeking permission from the author.
Falsification - involves the unauthorized creation or change of information in an
academic work or activity. For example, artificially creating data when it should be
collected from an actual experiment or inventing a source of information that does not
exist is considered fabrication or falsification.
Sabotage - the act of interfering with or damaging another person's work to prevent that
person from successfully completing an academic task. Destroying someone else's
artwork, experiment, or design, for example, is considered sabotage. Failure to contribute
as required to a team project can also be considered academic sabotage.
32
Contract Cheating - another form of academic dishonesty, which may happen in any of
the following situations (Gorenko, 2020):
● unpaid assistance from friends or family members to complete the work in place
of the learners
● a paper that has been taken from a free essay website and is being used as the
learner's own work
● an academic assignment done for a fee by a third-party service
Citing - Mentioning where you got the idea or information from.
PUPILS’ SURVEY
Part I: Specific Behaviors
This section asks you some questions about specific behaviors that some people
might consider as forms of academic dishonesty (cheat, plagiarism, falsification, or
sabotage). Please remember that this survey is completely anonymous and there is no
way that anyone can connect you with any of your answers.
Part I (A) Please mark your level of AWARENESS of that behavior as academic
dishonesty.
Are you aware that… is a dishonest Not at Slightly Moderately Very Slightly
academic action? all Aware aware awar Aware
Aware e
Copying from another pupil during a
test or exam.
Using unpermitted things during a test

or exam. (e.g. Cheat sheets or looking
on the internet for answers.)
Getting questions or answers from
someone who had already taken a test.
33
Using an electronic or digital device

(e.g., cellphone/smartphone) as an
unpermitted help during an exam.
Helping someone else cheat on a test.
Reading a shortened or summarized

version of a literature (e.g., books,
story, poems) rather than the original.
Reading literature in your own
language instead of what was told.
(e.g., reading Filipino work even
though it is told to read the English
version.)
Passing a work copied from another pupil.
Passing an assignment on which the

Working on an assignment with other

individual work.
Claiming participation for group work
when the pupil really didn't contribute.
Copying a few sentences from a site on the

Internet without citing them in a paper or
assignment submitted.
Copying a few sentences from a book,
them in a paper or assignment submitted.
Letting another pupil copy your

homework.
Submitting a paper that was taken in large
part from a website or from a book, journal
or other written source.
34
Pretending to be sick to postpone taking a

test/handing in an assignment.
Claiming of passing in a paper or project

when you had not done so.
Selling, buying, or distributing in some

other way, test or exam copies or
Part I (B) Please mark how OFTEN, if ever, in the past year you have ENGAGED in
any of the following behaviors.
In this past year… Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always
I copied from another pupil during a Sometimes Often Always

test or exam
I used unpermitted things during a test
or exam. (e.g. Cheat sheets or looking
on the internet for answers.)
I got questions or answers from
someone who had already taken a test.
I am using an electronic or digital

device (e.g., cellphone/smartphone)
during an exam.
I helped someone else cheat on a test.
I read a shortened or summarized

version of a literature (e.g., books,
story, poems) rather than the original.
35
I read literature in Filipino instead of

what was told. (e.g., reading Filipino
work even though it is told to read the
English version.)
I passed a work I copied from another
pupil.
I passed an assignment on which my

I worked on an assignment with other

individual work.
I claimed participation for group work
when I really didn't contribute.
I copied a few sentences from a site on the

Internet without citing them in a paper or
assignment I submitted.
I copied a few sentences from a book,
them in a paper or assignment I submitted.
I let another pupil copy my homework.
I submitted a paper that is taken in large

part from a website or from a book, journal
or other written source.
I pretended to be sick to postpone taking a
test/handing in an assignment.
I claimed to hand in a paper or project

when I had not done so.
I sold, purchased, or distributed in some

other way, test or exam copies or questions,
essays, or class notes.
Part II: Miscellaneous
36
1. If you indicated above that you have copied material from a written or electronic
source without citing it, please tell us how you accessed this material: (Choose only
one.)
Online resources only through the Internet

Print resources only such as book, encyclopedia, newspaper, etc.
Both online and print resources
2. How likely is it that: Very Unlikely Likely Very

Unlikely Likely
1. You would report an incident of
academic dishonesty (cheat, plagiarism,
falsification, or sabotage) that you
observed?
2. A pupil at Solano South Central School
would report such violations?
3. A pupil would report a close friend?
3. Which of the following circumstances justifies academic dishonesty in your

mind? (Check all that apply.)
More than half the class is doing it. Pupil involved in many outside
activities like household chores
Test is too hard or there’s too much Teacher hasn’t made policy clear
work.
Pupil is involved in many school Pressured to get good grades.
activities.
Will not be able to pass without Needed extra points to raise my grade
cheating. average.
Concerned about class rank. Other:
It’s never justified.
Learning material is
irrelevant/unimportant.
37
4. How strongly do you agree or Disagree Disagree Not Agree Agree

disagree with the following Strongly Sure Strongly
statements?
1. Academic dishonesty is a serious
problem at Solano South Central
School.
2. The investigation of suspected
incidents of academic dishonesty
is fair and impartial at Solano
South Central School.
3. Teachers at Solano South Central
School are observant in
discovering and reporting
suspected cases of academic
dishonesty.
Part III: Free Response

1. Please use this space for any comments you care to make, or if there is anything else
you would like to tell us about the topic of academic dishonesty.
38
Thank you for participating in this survey!
Teacher Interview Guide

Please tick (/) the appropriate answer for each question:
1. Gender:
Male
Female
2. Age:
Below 30
30-39
40-50
Above 50
3. Position: _____________________
4. Number of years as a teacher:

Less than 5 years
5-10 years
11-20 years
21-30 years
Above 30 years
Part 1: Academic Environment
39
Please tell us a little about yourself and the academic environment at Solano South
Central School.
1. How frequently have you Never Very Seldom/ Often Very
seen the following behaviors of Seldom Sometimes Often
pupils occur in your class
1. Plagiarizing on written
assignments
2. Inappropriately sharing work
in group assignments
3. Cheating during tests or
examinations
2. What do you think is the major reason some pupils do academic dishonesty
(cheat, plagiarism, falsification, or sabotage)?
3. Have you ever reported a pupil for academic dishonesty (cheating, plagiarism,
falsification, or sabotage)?
If not, why not?
4. Do teachers at Solano South Central School • Yes • No

catch most incidents of academic dishonesty
among their pupils? (cheating, plagiarism,
40
falsification, or sabotage)
What do teachers at your school usually do when they know a pupil has done any
academic dishonesty (cheat, plagiarism, falsification, or sabotage)?
5. What do you think are the most common ways in which pupils use new
technologies to commit academic dishonesty (cheat, plagiarism, falsification, or
sabotage) today?
RECOMMENDATION AND OPINION

Q1) Do you think your pupils are committing academic dishonesty now in modular
distance learning?
● If yes, in what way?
● Why do you think they commit academic dishonesty?
Q2) How do you identify someone committing academic dishonesty?

41
Q3) What is the impact on students if these problems are not controlled and solved?
Q4) Do you think this academic dishonesty phenomenon can be resolved? How?
Q5) In your opinion, what is the appropriate action for the offender caught committing
academic dishonesty (e.q. cheating, plagiarizing etc.)?
42
Thank you for participating in this survey!
43
Appendix C
44
Appendix D
45
Appendix E
46
Appendix F
47
Appendix G
48
Appendix H
Appendix I
49
50
Appendix J
51
52
53
54
CURRICULUM VITAE
Roselyn D. Dawong
Maggok,Hungduan, Ifugao
Cellphone Number: 09532975552
e-mail address: dawongroselyn77@gmail.com
PERSONAL INFORMATION:
BIRTHDAY: January 25, 2000

BIRTHPLACE: Hungduan, Ifugao
AGE: 21
NATIONALITY: Filipino
RELIGION: Roman Catholic
CIVIL STATUS: Single
FATHER’S NAME: Carlos M. Dawong
MOTHER’S NAME: Rosaline D. Dawong
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:
ELEMENTARY: Maggok Elementary School (2012)

SECONDARY:
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL: Don Bosco High School Lagawe, Ifugao (2016)
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL: Saint Mary’s University Bayombong Nueva Vizcaya
(2018)
ACHIEVEMENTS/AWARD RECEIVED:
ELEMENTARY: 5th Honor

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL: None
55

Brgy. Quirino, Solano, Nueva Vizacaya
Cellphone Number: 09451348384
e-mail address: ramosbusinessmail@gmail.com
PERSONAL INFORMATION:
BIRTHDAY: October 07, 1999

BIRTHPLACE: VRH Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya
AGE: 22
NATIONALITY: Filipino
RELIGION: Roman Catholic
CIVIL STATUS: Single
FATHER’S NAME: Warmelito A. Ramos
MOTHER’S NAME: Haidee F. Ramos
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:
ELEMENTARY: Solano South Elementary School (2012)

SECONDARY:
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL: Saint Luis School (2016)
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL: Saint Mary’s University Senior High School (2018)
ACHIEVEMENTS/AWARD RECEIVED:
ELEMENTARY:
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL:
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL: With honor
56

Analysis of Pupils' Academic Dishonesty in Modular Distance Learning in The New Normal

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analysis of Pupils' Academic Dishonesty in Modular Distance Learning in The New Normal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Saint Mary’s University

School of Teacher Education and Humanities

Analysis of Pupils’ Academic Dishonesty in Modular

Distance Learning in the New Normal

A Research Paper Presented to

The Faculty of the School of Teacher Education and Humanities

Saint Mary’s University

Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya

of the Course Requirements for the Degree

Bachelor in Elementary Education

Wendell Lordwyn F. Ramos

We would like to acknowledge the following individuals who have extended

To Mrs. Jovelyn G. Lacangan which allowed us to conduct the thesis at their

Keywords: academic dishonesty, modular distance learning, level of awareness, extent

B Data Gathering Instrument 31

Figure Title Pages

As Dangle and Sumaoang (2020) described, “face to face learning engagement of

Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan

Modular learning is a form of distance learning that uses Self-Learning Modules

"Good academic work must be based on honesty" (NIU, 2019a). Advancing

As mentioned in Samanta’s (2018) study, academic dishonesty is a growing

As mentioned by Peled et al. (2019), the unethical behaviors done in an

attitudes, linking types of motivation, and cultural backgrounds as predictors of

From the study of Balbuena and Lamena (2015), prevalence of cheating on

Conceptual and Analytical Framework

Academic integrity is not a new subject. As such, research summaries and

relatively constant, environments for learning are dramatically different in today’s

According to the International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) (2021),

According to DepEd (2020), Self-Learning Modules have been used by DepEd

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

Respondents Collection of data Assessment of

Figure 1. Research Paradigm of the Study

Analysis and Gathering of data

Figure 2. General Outline of the Study (Procedural Flowchart)

Modification of the Questionnaire and Interview guide. Modification of questions

Mean Ranges Interpretations

Level of Awareness Mean Ranges Extent of Practice

Not at all Aware 1.00-1.80 Never

Slightly Aware 1.81 - 2.60 Rarely

Moderately Aware 2.61 - 3.40 Sometimes

Very Aware 3.41 - 4.20 Often

Extremely Aware 4.21 - 5.00 Always

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

1. Copying from another pupil during a test 1.97 1.377 Slightly

Different Behaviors of Academic Dishonesty Mean SD QD

1.81-2.60 Slightly aware 3.41-4.20 Very aware

It is shown in Table 2 the awareness of respondents in the different behaviors of

1. I copied from another pupil during a test 1.27 .583 Never

Different Behaviors of Academic Dishonesty Mean SD QD

1.81-2.60 Rarely 3.41-4.20 Often

It is shown in Table 3 the extent of practice of the different behaviors of academic

practice of academic dishonesty of the pupils. It is followed by the item, “I read

1.50-2.49 Unlikely 3.50-4.00 Very Likely

As seen from Table 5, among the likelihood of reporting incidents of academic

Test is too hard or there’s too much work. 14 46.7 16 53.3

Pupil is involved in many school 10 33.3 20 66.7

Concerned about class rank. 11 36.7 19 63.3

It’s never justified. 6 20.0 24 80.0

Learning material is 6 20.0 24 80.0

Pressured to get good grades. 16 53.3 14 46.7

Needed extra points to raise my grade 10 33.3 20 66.7

1.81-2.60 Disagree 3.41-4.20 Agree

Legend: 1.00-1.80 Never 3.41-4.20 Often